In a world where a single click can trigger a torrent of targeted ads across platforms, the thin line between relevance and intrusion has become one of the most hotly debated topics in digital marketing. As hyper-personalization becomes the norm rather than the exception, brands are waking up to a new kind of consumer fatigue — one born not of poor targeting, but of too much targeting.
While the power of data-driven marketing is undeniable, the consequences of overstepping consumer boundaries are starting to show — in plummeting engagement, rising opt-outs, and, most worryingly, eroded trust.
At the heart of this dilemma lies intent. For some consumers, personalised content feels like a digital concierge service; for others, it feels like surveillance. Ankur Gattani, Chief Growth Officer at WebEngage, paints the contrast succinctly: “You have a butler who understands your preferences — that on Monday mornings you’d like to have juice, and on which afternoons you want to have a salad. Compare that to a new employee who asks you every single time what you want. That’s the difference personalization makes.”
But he also warns of what happens when that difference is ignored. “I'm not okay with finding out something about me which I did not tell you,” he says. For Gattani, the line is drawn at consent and context. “We operate 100% on explicit first-party data,” he emphasizes. “There is no way I let a brand owner on my platform use information that’s not captured from the platform.”
This emphasis on ethical data usage is echoed by Sanjay Krishnamurthy, President of GALE India. “Personalization in digital marketing is like a helpful shop assistant who remembers your preferences and suggests things you might genuinely like,” he explains. “But it crosses the line into intrusion when that assistant starts following you around everywhere, shouting irrelevant offers or making you feel like they know uncomfortably specific things about you without your permission.”
Krishnamurthy’s warning isn’t just anecdotal. Industry studies back it up. A report by Accenture found that 91% of consumers are more likely to shop with brands that provide relevant offers and recommendations. However, research by Cisco shows that 84% of consumers want more control over how their data is being used. The gap between personalization and perceived privacy violations is growing — and younger consumers, particularly Gen Z, are quicker than ever to disengage. “Once this trust is broken through poor personalization, it can be really tough for brands to win those customers back,” Krishnamurthy adds.
This is a reality Prasun Kumar, CMO of MagicBricks, is well aware of. “It starts with intent,” he says. “Personalised and hyper-personalised communication has been a part of our daily digital experiences for a while now. And they have been helpful to consumers wanting to make a well-informed decision. However, non-contextual and high-frequency reach can become counterproductive and reduce conversions.” He believes the best digital marketing feels like “a thoughtful nudge, not an unwelcome push.”
Kumar highlights the importance of empathy in crafting such nudges. “When ads feel too specific — for example, referencing a private conversation or following users across platforms — it can seem overly targeted.” Sensitive product categories like health, personal finance, or luxury goods are particularly prone to crossing the line, he notes, adding, “Consumers appreciate helpful suggestions, but not if it feels like brands are watching every move.”
That discomfort, says Prashin Jhobalia, CMO of House of Hiranandani, often manifests as ad fatigue or worse — a breakdown in trust. “When targeting becomes too aggressive or feels invasive, it doesn’t enhance engagement — it triggers discomfort,” he says.
At House of Hiranandani, the approach to personalization is curated and deliberate, driven by genuine user intent rather than algorithmic aggression. “Our goal is not to chase consumers across the internet, but to show up meaningfully when they’re actively seeking clarity or guidance in their home buying journey,” he says.
Jhobalia believes that transparency and relevance are the pillars of trustworthy personalization. “Hyper-personalization, when done with empathy and transparency, isn’t intrusive; it’s empowering. It has the potential to transform discovery into delight.”
As an example, he shares how the brand curates relevant location insights, infrastructure updates, and return-on-investment data for users interested in specific projects — a strategy that adds real value to the buyer’s journey. “Perceptive consumers can distinguish between brands genuinely seeking to understand them and those merely tracking their activity.”
This idea of stewardship may well define the future of personalization. A 2024 Adobe Digital Trends report found that while 73% of consumers expect personalized experiences, 76% also say they won’t engage with a brand that they don’t trust with their data. The balance, then, is not in how much you personalize, but how respectfully you do it.
For Himanshu Vig, Senior Consultant, Growth Advisory at Aranca, the issue is as much structural as it is strategic. “The boundary between personalization and intrusiveness is defined by three key factors: transparency, consumer control, and context,” he explains. “Personalization crosses into intrusiveness when consumers do not realize how their information is being compiled and used.”
Citing Forrester data, Vig notes that 71% of US adults know they’re being tracked online, but 65% believe cross-platform tracking without consent is wrong. “When brands monitor behavior across sites without explicit permission or connect unrelated data points to make predictions, they’ve crossed the line.”
Vig stresses the importance of consent-driven personalization, where consumers feel in control of the data they share. “Customer-centric marketers are emphasizing meaningful, consent-driven personalization that still offers customized experiences. They regard consumer information as borrowed, not owned — a privilege that demands wise stewardship.”
Hyper-personalization isn’t going anywhere — and nor should it. When rooted in transparency, context, and a clear value exchange, it remains one of the most powerful tools in a marketer’s arsenal. But as consumers grow savvier and data privacy norms grow stricter, the message to brands is clear: know when to stop.
Gattani sums it up, saying, “Some people will anyway unsubscribe because they don’t want to be nudged. They’d rather say, ‘I’ll buy when I want to buy. Don’t do all this magic.’”
And perhaps therein lies the final truth — that the most magical personalization feels effortless, not engineered.
.jpg)
